Gericault and Delacroix : Anthony Bond

The techniques of Gericault and Delacroix are often cited as inspirational for the artists who came after them in particular the Impressionists and through them for modernism as a whole. There is no question that this was understood to be true at the time and artists such as Pissaro, Manet, Seurat, Picasso and Matisse even Yves Klein acknowledged it. Cezanne said that Delacroix had “the greatest palette of France, and no one else beneath our skies possessed to a greater extent the vibration of colour. We all paint through him” But what was it about the works of Delacroix and Gericault that made them stand out as radical or that pointed towards what became known as modern?

3. Delacroix Sunset 1850
4. Delacroix The sea at Dieppe 1852
Certainly when we look at some paintings by Delacroix we could almost think they were by an impressionist but then even amongst these there are theatrical compositions that seem more 18th century than 19th. They both seem to have a foot in two worlds, even in his meticulous journal Delacroix seems at times ambivalent holding firm to tradition even as he innovates.

5. Delacroix Angelica and the wounded Medoro 1860
Our own painting is a good example of his in between-ness the technique is apparently very modern although as we will see not unlike studies by Rubens and other masters, on the other hand although the subject matter is more or less contemporary and based on his experiences in Morocco it is treated in highly Romantic almost Rococo style. It is worth noting that this was painted ten years after the ‘impressionist’ pictures.
6. Delacroix Winter- Juno and Aeolus 1856-63
7. Delacroix The Lion Hunt 1855
In the years between he also painted these great compositions in which classical, romantic and naturalistic tendencies all converge.

So to return to the question what made them seem modern to the next generation and to many observers today? There are many different and sometimes contradictory answers as usual in art history depending on whether you accept those who claimed Delacroix and Gericault as realists or those who saw them as furthering the cause of romanticism. Certainly they both dealt to a degree with naturalism as an empirical response to the world of appearances but they also both displayed the contradictory tendency towards epic theatricality. These contradictions prefigure Modernism's game of ping pong between realism and symbolism. However this lecture series is more concerned with technique and the way the art object feels as a material object than with its iconography or choice of subject matter.

I would like to explore how these artists fit into a longer trajectory in Western art as seen from a contemporary perspective. The history of modern art, moving into post modern theory, explores the shift of aesthetic value from being conceived as entirely embodied within an art object - towards an aesthetic of ideas and more significantly towards an aesthetic that is resolved at the point of reception. In other words the viewer is an active component in the production of an aesthetic experience. There has been a critical resistance to this proposition from those who deny the possibility and certainly the desirability of this perceived change of orientation.

However I am going to argue that this reorientation was not simply a post-modern shift away from tradition, neither does it undermine the value of the object as such, it is simply an acknowledgement that the aesthetic experience is and always has been one of engagement.

I am currently working on an exhibition tracing compelling tendencies in self-portraiture from the Renaissance to the 20th century. Working with Renaissance scholars here and overseas I am realising more and more how much continuity there is and how the most challenging of interpretations of art in the 20th and 21st centuries have their roots in the 16th century. It is in self portraiture that we find the most self conscious questioning of the nature of art as representation and authenticity throughout the past 500 years. The key element for my discussion will be the apparent authenticity of the viewer’s experience that comes with the visibility of brushwork. It is against this background that I will consider these two artists. Because Delacroix wrote a journal and was a very much more articulate and public figure than Gericault he will inevitably take a prominent place in this discussion.

Both artists at times use a very lose and expressive brushwork that might be seen as initiating the fragmentation of the image in modernism

8. Titian The Rape of Europa 1559-62
9. Titian Diana and Actaeon 1556-59
However Vasari noticed when he looked at late Titian paintings that the paintwork was very loose and that from close up the image became unreadable, dissolving into its component brush marks and dashes of colour. While some critics continued to find fault with art that lacks polish in the final version even in the late 19th century, for example Cezanne's painting was sometimes described as unfinished and rough, Vasari already saw merit in such emphasis on facture and described it with great insight.

He saw that at a certain distance the image resolved itself in the eye of the beholder. He even suggested that the need to move back and forth in front of the picture and to allow the eye to complete the image meant that there was a certain intimacy and internalisation of the image on the part of the viewer and that this intensified the affective dimension of the work.

Public ambivalence on this topic is not new. Rembrandt was considered by some later historians as a revolutionary because he resorted to the "rough method" which in effect meant looking back to Venetian painting, others considered him old fashioned since he went against the prevailing tendency towards a smooth polished finish that most of his students adopted when they took up their own practice. The same is true of Courbet, considered both a precursor of the modern by some and an adherent to the Rebrandtesque by others.

In the past months, with this paper in mind, I have been looking at great paintings in museums around the world with one eye tuned to works that share this tendency for open brushwork. Interestingly with a few significant exceptions they seem to prevail in the work of the greatest artists over the high finish of more academic painting that often turns out to be the manner of stylistic bronze medallists. This seems to me to have been the case since the 16th century cropping up even when you least expect it - for example in paintings by Fragonard.
10. Fragonard The Actor 1769 & Blind man’s bluff 1752?

Why then does public opinion still take an open or rough style to be modern or even confrontational? I accept that my assertion is already based on a very contemporary viewpoint where what is valued may to a degree be conditioned by contemporary considerations but lets have a look at some of the evidence.

11. Rembrandt Girl stepping into the water 1654
The term 'the rough method' is an oversimplification since the use of thick paint or of broken surfaces and the strong evidence of the hand of the artist may stem from very different requirements on the part of the artist. In Rembrandt's case the principle cause of the roughness was his determination to render form and texture. His impasto whites become more pronounced where the subject approaches the pictorial plane or the space of the viewer. In the background flat washes of brown blend away into obscurity while the highlights of the figures stand out in high relief. In this painting of Henrike Stoffels the famous stroke of the brush that forms the arm and wrist in one gesture animates the figure bringing a certain equivalence of paint and bodily motion.

He also simulated the texture of fur, rough cloth or jewellery with dabs of thick paint.
12. Rembrandt Jewish Bride 1665
13. Rembrandt Jewish Bride 1665

14. Courbet The wave 1969 & The Trout 1972
Courbet was very impressed by Rembrandt’s solidity of form and realist treatment of everyday subjects and emulated some of his techniques. He sought ways to simulate specific qualities such as the fluidity of water with varnish mixed into the paint to make it flow then spreading it with a palette knife as liquid slabs of colour or the dry stiff bristles of a brush to simulate an animal's fur. He simulated rock by dragging palette knife with dry paint across rough underpainting to give the rough feel of stone even sometimes including sand in the mix; oddly enough Vermeer also did this in his architectural subject matter. Vermeer was very interested in the effects of light on surfaces and sand in the paint catches the light quite differently from a varnished or flat surface. Courbet, more than almost any other painter, captures the feel of objects in his handling of the paint. the trout here is a great example but he is as good at hair or flesh or apples and pears.

One of the important side effects of the broken paint surface however has always been the possibility of breaking up the colour into dashes of purer pigment laid side by side rather than smoothing everything out into a carefully blended approximation of local colour. This was the discovery of Venetian painters including Titian and Veronese both of whom influenced Rubens who in turn inspired the young Delacroix.
15. Tiepolo Apotheosis of a Pope and Martyr 1780-5 & Veronese The Marriage at Cana 1562-3
16. Rubens Constantine investing his son Crispus with command of the fleet 1622
The meeting of David and Abigail
Delacroix noticed the use of luminosity in the shadows of Venetian painting, particularly Veronese, and emulated this by painting in glowing pastel underpainting over white grounds unlike the prevailing brown background and shadow areas in more heavily modelled painting techniques after Rembrandt and later Courbet. He then added thick paint over the washes building up the nearest objects or parts of forms combining the manner of Rembrandt with that of Veronese he also built up the impasto where the form turns as if sculpturally modelling the change of direction so that the brush follows the form closely.
17. Delacroix The death of Sardanopalus 1827-28
18. Delacroix Liberty leading the people 1830

19. Delacroix Nude man crouching 1850 & Three studies of Lions 1859
Delacroix had several friends who were sculptors and from them he learned to draw ‘from the middle’ rather than concentrating on the outline or contour. His drawings have something in common with Michelangelo and Henry Moore two of the most sculptural of draughtsmen.
20. Michelangelo Study for Libyan Sibyl
21. Henry Moore Family Group
This sculptural plasticity in his vision carried across into the painting through the brush strokes that extend the drawing process into paint. Drawing in paint is a bit like sculpting the marks trace the form. Looking at the marks on the paper you can see that they look like the trace of a chisel as it works across the surface of a form. This assimilation of competing traditions in the work of Delacroix has a startlingly theatrical effect.

Gericault was also strongly influenced by Michelangelo as drawings such as this study for the father in The raft of the Medusa reveal.
23. Gericault study for the figure of the father in the raft

24. Michelangelo Last Judgement 1508-12
In September and October 1816 he spent some time in Italy where he was most impressed by Michelangelo’s painting in the Sistine Chapel, the apocalyptic last judgement may have connected in his mind with his imagination of the tragic the sinking of the Medusa in July of that year.
22. Gericault Raft of the Medusa 1818
I will return to the making of this work later.

25. Constable Landscape with goatherds and goats after Claude Pastoral landscape 1636
Both Gericault and Delacroix had a great interest in the paintings of Constable and Turner whose reputation as precursors of modern art in Britain are very similar to those of The French painters who followed them. Delacroix actually spent some time in England in 1823-25 studying the techniques of Constable, Turner and Bonnington amongst others.

26. Turner Norham Castle on the river Tweed, summer Morning 1797 & Turner Norham Castle sunrise 1840
27. Turner detail of Norham Castle sunrise & detail Rain steam and speed 1844
Turner’s thin coloured grounds and transparent layers of paint achieve a sense of light and motion that also appealed to Delacroix, in some respects this follows from his interest in the Venetians but in Turner it is used for naturalistic effects rather than for sheer brilliance of composition.
28. Delacroix The Sea at Dieppe 1852
The sea at Dieppe may be thought of as a response to the naturalistic light of Turner while The death of Sardanopalus may have more in common with the Venetians.
29. Delacroix The death of Sardanopalus 1827-28

30. Constable Study for Hadleigh Castle 1829 & Study for Leaping Horse 1824
Constable on the other hand particularly in his plein air studies amplifies the broken paint method as if to capture the moment and the sense of being there in the wind or sunshine. This is the same effect Vasari noted in late Titian where we are drawn into the effects of the painting because we are making the picture as we look, resolving rough daubs of paint into the very sensation experienced by the artist on the site.

When in England Delacroix also took an interest in the watercolours of Bonnington the effect of the white paper on the luminosity of the colours which has some of the luminosity of the fresco. He began experimenting with a white ground in response to this, a technique which became commonplace for the impressionists.

Bonnington also introduced him to Copal Varnish which has been the cause of some problems for the conservation of paintings by Delacroix and subsequently for Courbet who also took it up. Delacroix liked to use varnish at all stages of the painting sometimes using temporary varnishes made of egg white which could be sponged off and wax in turps with a little oil of lavender which can be removed with turps. The Copal however when mixed with the oil paint can not be removed and makes cleaning very difficult since the top layer of varnish bonds with the layers that are carrying the pigment.
31. Courbet Landscape with stag 1873
32. Courbet Landscape with stag 1873 sections of the paint and copal layers.

This can be seen in our Courbet for example. Courbet used the varnish to make the paint thinner and more slippery to emulate the effects of running water but copal darkens and in this instance it can not be removed without dissolving the paint films below.

Delacroix kept a journal in which he systematically recorded his daily life as well as his reflections on art and technical notes about possible pigments and their combinations and the suggestions of friends. There are also his account books which demonstrate that he actually used the materials listed in the notes. This happy juxtaposition gives us a great start in studying the specifics of his practice. While these notes are too detailed for us to go into here some of the following observations are supported by this kind of evidence.

Delacroix in his journal insists on the signifying role of material and facture or as he simply put it “touch as an indicator of thought”.

33. Ingres La Source 1856
34. Ingres Turkish Bath 1862
He rails against the slick finish of the academic school including Ingres whom he saw as a cold advocate of contour and flat tone. It became common for commentators to oppose Ingres with Delacroix as if they were engaged in a battle between line and colour, between academic values and innovation or expression.

35. Gericault The charging Chasseur 1815?
Delacroix admired Gericault’s impasto “his paste of colours” but he himself always sought to control his own “plastic ardours” Trained as a neo classicist under Pierre - Narcisse Guerin he retained a sense of discipline that balanced his spontaneous disposition. Baudelaire spoke of this as a double character in Delacroix “in which moderation could not exist without overflow”

36. Rubens Marie de’Medici landing at Marseilles 1622-6
37. Rubens The Three graces 1639
Delacroix wrote of his fascination with Rubens and in particular what he called his sense of relief and solidity which he contrasted with the flatness of the academics.
He also remarked on the prodigious vitality given by the relief of his figures. The ferment of life that Delacroix found in the work of Rubens came to characterise his own work. Baudelaire noted after his death “We admire in him the violence, the sudden quality of the gestures, the turbulence of the compositions, and the magic of the colour.” The connection back through Rubens to Michelangelo is also striking particularly in something like the Dante and Virgil or Christ on the sea of Galilee.
38. Delacroix Christ on The Sea of Galilee 1840-45

Delacroix on the other hand had that disciplined side that eschewed the spontaneous and sought to suppress the trace of the tool. “If we want to render thought in painting we should avoid the signs of the hand, the hand will have very little importance, only the mind and the eye of the painter will have a role to play” or “The great thing is to avoid this infernal facility of the brush.” In effect he had mixed views and set up a kind of hierarchy of good and bad expressions of the brush mark. “I have often asked myself why extreme facility, boldness of touch, do not shock me in Rubens yet are detestable practices in the Vanloo” ( he dubbed all 18th century painting Vanloo) The bad gesture for him was where it existed for its own sake rather than being in the service of thought and of feeling. He used what he described as ‘touch’ to model the form and to convey distance from the viewer in a very sculptural way.

He does not in fact talk in his journals about the relation of colour to touch however the juxtaposition of dabs of pure colour that combines in the retina is clearly his gift to impressionism and to post impressionists such as Seurat and Serusier. He does however make it clear that he was aware of the colour theory of Michel-Eugene Chevreul in which he points out how a pure colour on its own appears to have a faint ring of its complimentary. He also noted that half tones were best made by adding the complementary colour rather than black in one of the African notebooks and this is derived from the optical theory of Chevreul that was so influential for the Impressionists.

39. Gericault The Raft of the Medusa 1818 & Michelangelo The Last Judgement 1508-12
I would like to finish up by looking a bit more closely at Gericault’s The Raft of the Medusa & Delacroix’s The Barque of Dante that was influenced by its dramatic effects. You will recall that Gericault was very impressed by Michelangelo’s Last Judgement in Rome he reports having trembled in front of it. The images of the Deluge must certainly have been fresh in his mind when he began work on the Raft of the Medusa two years later. Gericault read a harrowing account by two of the survivors that were published in 1817. The Medusa was sunk with the loss of 135 crew and passengers abandoned by the ship’s captain on a makeshift raft. When the survivors were picked up 13 days later the evidence of cannibalism was there for all to see.

It was an epic tragedy that was also a very political event, the aristocratic captain who abandoned his charge was taken as evidence of the corruption of the system. Gericault chose not to highlight this aspect of the event but toyed with the episodes of cannibalism and finally on the sighting of the rescue vessel. This latter decision allowed for a monumental triangulation of the composition with a base of cadavers and then a swirling mass of bodies culminating in the figure who signals with a cloth to the distant vessel. In order to prepare for this he made many drawings of slightly different moments from the narrative.
40. Gericault study for a version of the raft hailing the rescue ship
41. Gericault study for the sighting of the rescue ship from the raft
42. Gericault study for the reclining nude in the raft
43. Gericault study for the figure of the father on the raft
44. Gericault study for the cannibalism theme on the raft
Gericault made a number of studies of amputated limbs and even a decapitated head in a number of dissection rooms in hospitals and goals in preparation for the scenes of death and cannibalism. He also made rough oil studies of the composition before finally settling on the composition.
45. Gericault oil study for the raft

This composition is a highly charged romantic painting designed to heighten the emotion of the viewer and at the same time it represents a real event with powerful political relevance in his time. It is typical of both Delacroix and Gericault that the work combines realism with theatrical traditions inspired by Michelangelo.

46. Delacroix Dante and Virgil on the Barque 1822
Delacroix painted his first Salon entry, The Barque of Dante in 1822 It is clearly influenced by the Raft of the Medusa but also has its own line straight back to Michelangelo via Rubens.
47. Rubens detail of Marie de Medici landing at Marseilles 1622-6
The famous droplets of water on the foreground figures are supposed to be directly responding to Rubens’ The Landing of Marie de’Medici at Marseilles. Delacroix copied this painting on more than one occasion. It is necessary to see the works in the flesh to detect the strokes of pure colour that make these droplets sparkle but I hope the effect is apparent even if you cannot detect the means.

48. The Barque and The Raft
Looking at slides and books just doesn’t cut it when we want to really appreciate the effects of the brush, we need to come close then step back as suggested by Vasari 500 years ago and that is why we must try very hard to bring exhibitions of great masterpieces to Sydney in spite of the increased difficulties.

I don’t think I have solved anything here but I may have set up a position from which we can explore the emergence of the modern next year. What I like about it is that nothing is clear cut - tradition does not stop suddenly in 1870s. There is no singular tradition while ideas that fuel contemporary art today are deeply embedded in the history of innovation that has characterised western art since the Renaissance.